|
Introductory presupposition for IJ Lesson Study
|
Ron Corson
|
Jun 24, 2006 09:56 PDT
|
As I am also putting this out with a link on my blog
http://cafesda.blogspot.com
much of these comments on this quarters lessons will be found on my
website because I put in quite a few links which don't work so well
here.
So here is the first one for the new Lesson Study on the gospel, 1844
and judgment. Of course the point of the study is to deal with the
Investigative Judgment but as they like to transfer judgment which
pretty much all Christians agree with with Investigative Judgment which
no one outside the SDA or SDA offshoots believe in. This gives some of
the presuppostions needed even to feel there is any use of the IJ, and
of course many Christians do not have these presuppositions.
http://www.newprotestants.com/ijintro.htm
I will go ahead and copy it here just to see how it works:
Earlier on an internet forum Clifford Goldstein stated that this
quarter’s lesson would prove the Investigative Judgment using the Bible
and not relying on Ellen White. Many on the forum were skeptical and I
have been eagerly awaiting this quarter’s lesson to see how well he
does.
As I start my conversation about the Sabbath School Quarterlies lessons
on 1844, the Gospel and the Investigative Judgment I would like to
introduce the subject with some material from Kenneth Hart’s Sabbath
School class.
As he introduces the subject he notes that the Investigative Judgment
is based upon a number of SDA assumptions. He lists a few and I will add
a few more that he referenced but did not acknowledge as things which
other Christians do not hold.
From Hart’s The Gospel, 1844, and the Judgment - Lesson #1 study aid:
We do, however, have one unique doctrine. A doctrine which sets us apart
from all other Christian denominations: our belief in the preadvent
judgment beginning in the year 1844. Other Christians have made fun of
us because of this doctrine. Many among us are uncomfortable in holding
a doctrine that no other Christian group believes in. So what is the
truth about this doctrine? 1) In order to accept and understand the
pre-advent judgment you must first believe in the non-immortality of the
soul. This immediately separates us from the vast majority of
Christians.
If each person goes to his reward–either heaven or hell (or temporarily
to purgatory)–at the time of death then there would be no reason for a
pre-advent judgment, because each person would have already gone to his
“reward”.
Seventh-day Adventists–along with some other Christians–believe that
there are many other beings inhabiting other parts of this vast universe
in which we live. Do these other beings have anything to do with the
judgment? Do they care about the judgment? Do they care about what
happens here on planet Earth? Paul suggest that this little world is the
theater of the universe! (1 Corinthians 4:9). Why would this be?
While the rest of the universe is not a main emphasis of the Scriptures
as we have them, nevertheless these creatures who live outside of our
world are mentioned frequently. See handout: “The Great Controversy in
Scripture”. There are clearly many references to God, his angels, the
devil, his angels, and creatures who live on other planets in the
Scripture.
Do you understand the word “theodicy”? It means literally the “judgment
of God”. It is derived from two words: theos, God, and dike, judgment.
(Derived from the Greek word deiknuo or deiknumi which means “to show,
expose to the eyes. 2 metaph. 2A to give evidence or proof of a thing.
2B to show by words or teach.” (Compare Laodicea, laos, people, and
dike, judgment.) We are people who live in the time of the judgment.
(Revelation 3:14-22) When the evidence is presented, God wins his case.
(Romans 3:4).
--
1. The idea of non immortality of the soul is not necessarily the
element which causes the trouble with accepting the IJ. There are
certainly other groups who believe in annihilationism of the wicked. So
more accurately what one has to believe for the IJ to work is the idea
of “Soul Sleep” in other words they must believe that the believer rests
in a state of unconsciousness until the second coming. The majority of
Christians however believe that for the believer to be “absent from the
body is to be present with the Lord”. The point I am making here is not
what is correct or not, because clearly there is a difference of
opinions on some of these issues and each side has Biblical verses for
their support. The purpose here is to show just how many presuppositions
the SDA makes to come to the place where he or she can accept the IJ. If
you believe that as a believer when you die you go to be with the Lord
then the IJ would make no sense at all. The person would have a
preadvent judgment but it would not in any way be an investigative
judgment.
2. While most all Christians believe in angels very few accept the idea
of a universe populated by unfallen beings. They have no reason to
assume that God must prove his case to unfallen beings, they have no
reason to believe that these beings or angels have any doubts about God
or need to have the assurance that God is only bringing people to
eternity who are, “safe to save”. That Paul uses the word universe does
not mean that it contains the idea of inhabited planets. Simply put at
that time they had no idea about what planets really were. This is why
Paul only covers the part of the Universe that had been revealed angels
and men.
1CO 4:9 For it seems to me that God has put us apostles on display at
the end of the procession, like men condemned to die in the arena. We
have been made a spectacle to the whole universe, to angels as well as
to men.
As the Expositor’s Bible Commentary foot note says:
9 Kosmos (kosmos) is used here in the enlarged sense of "universe,"
introducing the dual concept of angels who inhabit the universe and men
who live on earth.
SDA’s have a different concept here based upon Ellen White. As Hart
says: “See handout: “The Great Controversy in Scripture”. There are
clearly many references to God, his angels, the devil, his angels, and
creatures who live on other planets in the Scripture.” There are
actually no references to creatures on other planets in Scripture,
however operating within the Adventist paradigm of the Great Controversy
incorporates Ellen Whites teachings as if they were Scripture.
Frequently SDA’s will refer to Job where: (Job 1:6 KJV) Now there was a
day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and
Satan came also among them.
However as most Bibles use the word angels here and even Ellen White
refers to these beings as angels it does not really work on any level to
support the concept of unfallen beings on other planets.
In Hart’s Sabbath School class which you can listen to he noted that we
are living in the time period of the church of Laodecia and he
interprets the name Laodecia as meaning time of God’s judgment. This
takes a couple of other assumptions which are very much Adventist views.
The common Adventist view is that the 7 churches listed in Revelation
represent different time period through history. This is a historicist
perspective which again is largely not accepted by contemporary
Christians. There is no clear cut reason to see those churches as
representing different times in history. The more likely view is that
each church represents the condition of some Christians. When you look
at historicist writing on the subject of the 7 churches you often do not
find real agreement upon their supposed time periods. As different as
Historicists are from Futurists thanks to Darby there is a general
acceptance of these church time period view, Darby introduces them as
Dispensations. A couple of examples
THE SEVEN CHURCHES OF REVELATION ARE:
1. EPHESUS The Apostolic Church 30 AD - 100 AD.
(Letting go)
2. SMYRNA The Suffering Church 100 AD - 313 AD.
(Anointing Oil)
3. PERGAMOS The Compromising Church 313 AD - 606 AD.
(Married to Power)
4. THYATIRA The Idolatrous Church 606 AD - 1517 AD.
(Ruled by a Woman)
5. SARDIS The Reformation Church 1517 AD - 1750 AD.
(Shining Light)
6. PHILADELPHIA The Revival Church 1750 AD - 1900 AD.
(Brotherly Love)
7. LAODICEAN The Lukewarm Church 1900 AD - ?
(Power of the People)
Ephesus – Apostolic church (A.D. 30-100) · Smyrna – Persecuted
church (A.D.100-312)· Pergamos – Indulged church (A.D. 312-606) ·
Thyatira – Papal church (A.D. 606-Tribulaion)· Sardis –
Dead church (A.D. 1520-Tribulation) · Philadelphia – Missionary
church (A.D. 1750-Rapture)· Laodicea – Apostate church (A.D.
1900-Tribulation) Several examples here:
"Laodicea" means "judgment of the nations"... it is the "lukewarm
church", that God is about to vomit... the church to which Jesus does
not give any praise and it will end up with the "Judgment of the
Nations"...
And it is our time!... the seventh and last one, from Vatican
Council II, in 1962-65, to the end of time... if it lasts as much as the
first period, the church of Ephesus, it will be about the year 2,000?...
Time of the 7 periods of the 7 churches:
- Ephesus: 30 years. - Smyrna: 250 years. -
Pergamos: 500 years.
- Thyatira: 500 years. - Sardis: 250 years. -
Philadelphia: 400 years.
- Laodicea: 30 years?.
Some other creative views:
The likely messengers to the church are: 1. St. Paul to the Church of
Ephesus
2. St. John to the Church of Smyrna 3 Arius* to the Church of Pergamos
4. Peter Waldo to the Church of Thyatira 5. John Wycliffe to the
Church of Sardis
6. Martin Luther to the Church of Philadelphia 7. Charles Russell* to
the Church of Laodicea.
Branham claimed that the angels (messengers) to the 7 churches in the
book of Revelation were men who appeared at various times throughout
Church history bringing new revelations that led the Church into
progressive stages of sanctification. As his tombstone indicates,
Branham was thought to be the angel to the Church of Laodicea-the end
time Church. Rev.3:14, 10:7 Ephesian-Paul; Smyrnea-Ireneaus;
Pergamean-Martin; Thyatirean-Columba; Sardisean-Luther;
Philadelphia-Wesley; Laodicea-Branham
The meaning of the name “people judged” is used in the description of
the church that it thought itself wealthy but was not and if it did not
change God would spew it out of his mouth, a judgment as of lukewarm
water transported from the neighboring hot springs, a taste that does
not satisfy but annoys. So certainly judgment in a sense is involved but
you can find some type of judgment in most of the messages to the 7
churches. Some examples:
Condensed from Rev 2:1-7 "To the angel of the church in Ephesus write: I
know your deeds, You have persevered, Yet I hold this against you:
Repent and do the things you did at first. If you do not repent, I will
come to you and remove your lampstand from its place.
From Rev 2:8-10 "To the angel of the church in Smyrna write: Be
faithful, even to the point of death, and I will give you the crown of
life.
From Rev 2:12-16 "To the angel of the church in Pergamum write: Repent
therefore! Otherwise, I will soon come to you and will fight against
them with the sword of my mouth.
So in many of the churches there is the concept of a judgment which
reflects the condition of the people. The idea of living in the Time of
Laodecia may have the most widespread acceptance of the unique SDA
presuppositions though the dating with mid 1800’s does not fit with many
of the interpretations.
Hart in introducing his lesson study notes at lesson 1 minute 12
..Those three things are absolutely fundamental, do we agree on those
three things. If we don't then we've got to go back at least closer to
scratch and start over again. Because if we are not sure about the non
immortality of the soul, if we are not sure about the existence of
angels and beings in the rest of the universe, or if we are not sure
about the fact that the great controversy is primarily about answering
the questions about God that have been raised by the devil and others
and so forth . Then the preadvent judgment takes a completely different
angle in terms of what it says to us as to why it's conducted etc.
Here Hart has introduced one of the lynch pins of the Adventist
paradigm, The Great Controversy. While elements of the battle between
good and evil, God and Satan, wicked and righteous are a constant
background of the Bible the Great Controversy includes elements which
are not present in the Bible. I have spoken with many who try to define
the term and the best they usually do is reference some of Ellen Whites
writings. As Hart continues at 13min 30 seconds:
What I would hope is that we would all have an understanding of Ellen
White's view of what this is all about which in my opinion is the
fundamental Seventh-day Adventist view.
Contrary to the position Clifford Goldstein took where he said he would
demonstrate the Investigative Judgment from the Bible Kenneth Hart in
his opening lecture acknowledges that we have several presuppositions
which would exclude other Christians from accepting the Investigative
Judgment and acknowledged the heavy dependence we have for this doctrine
upon Ellen White and the SDA pioneers.
At 15 minutes in his lesson 1 lecture In reference to Rev. 14 Hart says:
When I was a child...when someone joined the Adventist church the
expression was you've accepted the three angels messages in fact more
specific than that we used to even say you've accepted the third angels
message. What we really meant was all three.
In Lesson 2 he clarifies even more what he means by the above. Minute
10-11
Rev 14:6-7 and this should be ...very familiar then I say another angel
and this would be... [Quotes verse and continues] now we as Seventh-day
Adventists hopefully take these verses very seriously because this is
our..I don't know if I would call it our magna carta this is our…we say
that these three angels messages that's that's us right?
We see that this class after the original and I think useful
introduction preceded to traditional SDA concepts in the class and in
fact even though this class is more in favor of the larger view of the
atonement as seen in Graham Maxwell's views. This class has begun the
study of the Investigative judgment by not going to the Bible but by
going to Ellen White and SDA tradition. And their goal is to understand
it they way Ellen White does and then expand upon it from there. Because
Ellen White clearly does believe in forensic, Penal, substitutionary
atonement and a literal going over of the books of the righteous to
determine who's sins will be blotted out and thus who will be saved.
Kenneth Hart likely intends to expand upon EGW's views in the direction
of the Larger View interpretation.
I have still not dealt with several other areas where other Christians
would not find the Investigative Judgment useful or 1844 to be of any
significance. Few Christians hold to the concept of a day for a year in
Bible prophecy, while it was once popular it’s failures in the past have
taken it out of the respected or useful category of Bible Study tools.
Nor have I dealt with those who believe in predestination like
Augustine, Luther and Calvin. So we have another presupposition involved
in the acceptance or rejection of the IJ. Even with all these I doubt I
have covered all the presuppositions that have to be accepted before one
can find any use at all for the Investigative Judgment. Hopefully it is
enough to get people thinking in ways that traditional Adventism has not
often acknowledged.
|
|
 |
|
